SAFE ENGINE Test Stand: In a previous column I wrote about engine test stands that I've used to break in engines and commented that I hadn't had much luck finding one with lasting quality. The issue for me in using them throughout the years was that most were made from wood that secured engines with springs and wing nuts. Although the wood was strong and of high quality, the springs and wing nuts that held the engine in place often vibrated loose. I commented that on occasion I had to quickly shut things down in order to prevent engines from leaving the mounter worse, chase the setup as it vibrated across the floor while it was coming apart. I also mentioned the lack of a system that addressed the whole test-stand environment; i.e., engine mounting, throttle, tuned pipes, and fuel tanks. Since making those comments I've received responses from modelers that run the gamut. Most focused on using common sense when setting things up, while others let me know how they mounted test stands to shop workbenches and wondered how a test stand could move. I'd like to think that modelers use common sense when using test stands, although I've seen huge variations in applications of "common sense" as I've assisted people through the years. One setup was attached to a telephone pole on a street corner, and another was attached to a large cardboard box in a garage, but the most creative was a helicopter wired down to a board that was wired to another item. One hopes that common sense is always applied when running up engines on test stands, but, alas, this is a hobby, and one should learn to expect the unexpected (Murphy is always with us). Ray Kohn contacted me to let me know there is a test stand on the market that works safely, fits many different engines, is strong, is reliable, and comes with an optional ground-mounted metal post. He wrote: "I, too, am new to the hobby (year and a half) and have heard numerous horror stories regarding the engine mounts associated with breaking in an engine. In some cases, some folks have tried to break in their engine on the airplane with sometimes-disastrous results to the airplane. In other cases, like in your story, there aren't many 'hold-downs' that can effectively secure an engine over time, and eventually problems crop up. "I located a source that manufactures 'break-in' stands that are made of solid aluminum. I purchased one of these stands and mounted it to the top of a Black & Decker® 'Work Mate' bench. (As you face the front of the Work Mate bench, I mounted the stand on the left back edge, so the engine's prop is facing left over the side edge of the bench.) "The mount has worked flawlessly with everything from a Saito 56 all the way up to a Saito 180. And this includes rich vibrating idle settings all the way up to full throttle adjustments. The engines never moved, and the bench remained solidly in one place. (These stands are very heavy and sturdy for their size.) I would estimate that I have a total of 5 to 10 hours of engine running time on this setup. "The manufacturer is PSP Manufacturing. Their Web site is www.pspmfg.com and their test stands are the best in the business. Very strong, very durable, with an absolute positive engine hold-down means. They even offer a metal post for installing their stands into the ground: however, I found the Work Mate bench to be just fine for my glow engines. Their stands can also handle very large engines, and they offer special mounts for rear mounted engines. It's a nice product worth taking a look at. especially when 'Safety Comes First.'" Sally Perkins—the owner of PSP Manufacturing—also wrote in to describe the mount system. She indicated that it is a Billet Engine Break-In Stand that was designed for two reasons: "ease of operation and safety." Sally describes the test stand construction as "'/2 inch thick anodized 6061 billet aluminum with heavy-duty adjustable motor pads constructed out of Vu inch thick anodized 6061T6 aluminum and stainless steel." The test stand is advertised to run everything from a Norvel .049 engine to a SuperTigre 4500. With the optional FSP Back Mount Adaptor, the unit can handle everything from the .049 to a 150cc gasoline engine. The optional ground-mounting stand is 56 inches long and is constructed from 100% powder-coated steel. It is recommended that it be mounted in cement for larger engines but can be driven 18-24 inches into the ground when using smaller engines. If you acquire one of these mounts after reading this column, drop me a line and let me know what you think of it. I'll include the comments here. Accident Data: On occasion, AMA members ask me to provide accident data to club safety officers which reflects accident trends or issues related to known equipment failures that have potential effects on many modelers. Arriving recently with the same question was an E-mail from Bill Vail. "I'm the safety officer for the Meridian (Mississippi) Aeromodelers and have a little background in safety that may help my club. I was in the Navy as a pilot for a number of years and was fortunate enough to be sent to the Navy's eight week aviation safety school in Monterey. "The school was great but when I got home they said I had to be the air wing safety officer (what did I do to them?). Safety is safely no matter how big the airplane. I've been modeling in one form or another for 35+ years. As you probably know, one of the key elements of any safety program is just getting folks to 'think safe.' "I found that one of the most effective techniques in my past safety work was nothing more than talking about safety and safety issues. If I pick some topic at everv meeting and talked about it, maybe folks will consider safety more completely in everything they do. We (our club and the AMA) have established a set of rules that promote safety, but if folks aren't thinking safety in their building, flying, and pit/setup work, our rules are meaningless. "One of the greatest tools I had when I was in the Navy was a weekly message the Naval Safety Center put out of the accidents or injuries for the past week. I would usually brief the ready room on how people got hurt in the Navy. The accidents ranged from airplanes flying into the ground to people slipping and falling (and slicking their foot under the lawn mower) to two drunks playing with a 9mm ... you get the idea. "Now to the question part—finally. Is there any such information available from the AMA? "How people got hurt modeling this week.' I'd like to get up at the next meeting and tell the members 'the AMA had __ claims or reported injuries this month, and here is how they happened.' "Our primary concern in the safety business is to prevent mishaps. If we fail to prevent a mishap, our job then becomes to identify what happened so that we can avoid that mistake in the future. What can I tell our membership about past AMA accidents? "This jewel is from my dad, not the Naval Safety Center: 'A wise man learns from his mistakes, but a brilliant man learns from others' mistakes.' Thanks for your time and thanks in advance for whatever information you can provide." Bill makes a number of valid points and asks some valuable questions. Yes, AMA establishes reviews and updates its safety code to address those issues that it feels places members and AMA as an organization at risk. The intent of the safety code is to make modelers "aware" through application of a "code of conduct" of known hazards/behaviors that will cause harm. You agree to follow this code when you join AMA and/or subsequently renew your membership. If you are derelict in following the code, you run the risk of not being covered under AMA insurance policies and may be personally liable for injuries or property damage inflicted on others. Regarding AMA providing accumulated data that could be used to "educate" or "inform" the modeling public, I—as a columnist—have asked for but have never been granted access to this type of data. Reasons for denial have been based on pending legal issues related to claims/settlements and the fact that my safety column is not intended to represent AMA's official safety views. (With proper rules in place, I believe it could and should.) Any number of issues cited could prevent the release of name, place, and settlement data, but what Bill asked in additional correspondence was right on the mark: Would it be possible to set up an AMA safety Web site or link that provides nonpersonalized safety information? "A secondary goal of model safety is to help the AMA and its insurance programs," Bill pointed out. "The primary goal is keeping our friends and family safe and flying at the field." I agree. If you feel that this type of information would be valuable to you and your local club members, let your AMA national and district representatives hear your concerns. Please call or write to them to express your opinions. You can find out who represents your area and how to contact them at www.inodelaircraft.org. Until next month, play it safe! MU
Edition: Model Aviation - 2002/09
Page Numbers: 84, 93
SAFE ENGINE Test Stand: In a previous column I wrote about engine test stands that I've used to break in engines and commented that I hadn't had much luck finding one with lasting quality. The issue for me in using them throughout the years was that most were made from wood that secured engines with springs and wing nuts. Although the wood was strong and of high quality, the springs and wing nuts that held the engine in place often vibrated loose. I commented that on occasion I had to quickly shut things down in order to prevent engines from leaving the mounter worse, chase the setup as it vibrated across the floor while it was coming apart. I also mentioned the lack of a system that addressed the whole test-stand environment; i.e., engine mounting, throttle, tuned pipes, and fuel tanks. Since making those comments I've received responses from modelers that run the gamut. Most focused on using common sense when setting things up, while others let me know how they mounted test stands to shop workbenches and wondered how a test stand could move. I'd like to think that modelers use common sense when using test stands, although I've seen huge variations in applications of "common sense" as I've assisted people through the years. One setup was attached to a telephone pole on a street corner, and another was attached to a large cardboard box in a garage, but the most creative was a helicopter wired down to a board that was wired to another item. One hopes that common sense is always applied when running up engines on test stands, but, alas, this is a hobby, and one should learn to expect the unexpected (Murphy is always with us). Ray Kohn contacted me to let me know there is a test stand on the market that works safely, fits many different engines, is strong, is reliable, and comes with an optional ground-mounted metal post. He wrote: "I, too, am new to the hobby (year and a half) and have heard numerous horror stories regarding the engine mounts associated with breaking in an engine. In some cases, some folks have tried to break in their engine on the airplane with sometimes-disastrous results to the airplane. In other cases, like in your story, there aren't many 'hold-downs' that can effectively secure an engine over time, and eventually problems crop up. "I located a source that manufactures 'break-in' stands that are made of solid aluminum. I purchased one of these stands and mounted it to the top of a Black & Decker® 'Work Mate' bench. (As you face the front of the Work Mate bench, I mounted the stand on the left back edge, so the engine's prop is facing left over the side edge of the bench.) "The mount has worked flawlessly with everything from a Saito 56 all the way up to a Saito 180. And this includes rich vibrating idle settings all the way up to full throttle adjustments. The engines never moved, and the bench remained solidly in one place. (These stands are very heavy and sturdy for their size.) I would estimate that I have a total of 5 to 10 hours of engine running time on this setup. "The manufacturer is PSP Manufacturing. Their Web site is www.pspmfg.com and their test stands are the best in the business. Very strong, very durable, with an absolute positive engine hold-down means. They even offer a metal post for installing their stands into the ground: however, I found the Work Mate bench to be just fine for my glow engines. Their stands can also handle very large engines, and they offer special mounts for rear mounted engines. It's a nice product worth taking a look at. especially when 'Safety Comes First.'" Sally Perkins—the owner of PSP Manufacturing—also wrote in to describe the mount system. She indicated that it is a Billet Engine Break-In Stand that was designed for two reasons: "ease of operation and safety." Sally describes the test stand construction as "'/2 inch thick anodized 6061 billet aluminum with heavy-duty adjustable motor pads constructed out of Vu inch thick anodized 6061T6 aluminum and stainless steel." The test stand is advertised to run everything from a Norvel .049 engine to a SuperTigre 4500. With the optional FSP Back Mount Adaptor, the unit can handle everything from the .049 to a 150cc gasoline engine. The optional ground-mounting stand is 56 inches long and is constructed from 100% powder-coated steel. It is recommended that it be mounted in cement for larger engines but can be driven 18-24 inches into the ground when using smaller engines. If you acquire one of these mounts after reading this column, drop me a line and let me know what you think of it. I'll include the comments here. Accident Data: On occasion, AMA members ask me to provide accident data to club safety officers which reflects accident trends or issues related to known equipment failures that have potential effects on many modelers. Arriving recently with the same question was an E-mail from Bill Vail. "I'm the safety officer for the Meridian (Mississippi) Aeromodelers and have a little background in safety that may help my club. I was in the Navy as a pilot for a number of years and was fortunate enough to be sent to the Navy's eight week aviation safety school in Monterey. "The school was great but when I got home they said I had to be the air wing safety officer (what did I do to them?). Safety is safely no matter how big the airplane. I've been modeling in one form or another for 35+ years. As you probably know, one of the key elements of any safety program is just getting folks to 'think safe.' "I found that one of the most effective techniques in my past safety work was nothing more than talking about safety and safety issues. If I pick some topic at everv meeting and talked about it, maybe folks will consider safety more completely in everything they do. We (our club and the AMA) have established a set of rules that promote safety, but if folks aren't thinking safety in their building, flying, and pit/setup work, our rules are meaningless. "One of the greatest tools I had when I was in the Navy was a weekly message the Naval Safety Center put out of the accidents or injuries for the past week. I would usually brief the ready room on how people got hurt in the Navy. The accidents ranged from airplanes flying into the ground to people slipping and falling (and slicking their foot under the lawn mower) to two drunks playing with a 9mm ... you get the idea. "Now to the question part—finally. Is there any such information available from the AMA? "How people got hurt modeling this week.' I'd like to get up at the next meeting and tell the members 'the AMA had __ claims or reported injuries this month, and here is how they happened.' "Our primary concern in the safety business is to prevent mishaps. If we fail to prevent a mishap, our job then becomes to identify what happened so that we can avoid that mistake in the future. What can I tell our membership about past AMA accidents? "This jewel is from my dad, not the Naval Safety Center: 'A wise man learns from his mistakes, but a brilliant man learns from others' mistakes.' Thanks for your time and thanks in advance for whatever information you can provide." Bill makes a number of valid points and asks some valuable questions. Yes, AMA establishes reviews and updates its safety code to address those issues that it feels places members and AMA as an organization at risk. The intent of the safety code is to make modelers "aware" through application of a "code of conduct" of known hazards/behaviors that will cause harm. You agree to follow this code when you join AMA and/or subsequently renew your membership. If you are derelict in following the code, you run the risk of not being covered under AMA insurance policies and may be personally liable for injuries or property damage inflicted on others. Regarding AMA providing accumulated data that could be used to "educate" or "inform" the modeling public, I—as a columnist—have asked for but have never been granted access to this type of data. Reasons for denial have been based on pending legal issues related to claims/settlements and the fact that my safety column is not intended to represent AMA's official safety views. (With proper rules in place, I believe it could and should.) Any number of issues cited could prevent the release of name, place, and settlement data, but what Bill asked in additional correspondence was right on the mark: Would it be possible to set up an AMA safety Web site or link that provides nonpersonalized safety information? "A secondary goal of model safety is to help the AMA and its insurance programs," Bill pointed out. "The primary goal is keeping our friends and family safe and flying at the field." I agree. If you feel that this type of information would be valuable to you and your local club members, let your AMA national and district representatives hear your concerns. Please call or write to them to express your opinions. You can find out who represents your area and how to contact them at www.inodelaircraft.org. Until next month, play it safe! MU